SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

LOKESHWAR PRASAD, DESH BANDHU AGGARWAL, RUMNITA MITTAL
PUSHPA GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
AGANALL TRADERS LTD. – Respondent


ORDER

Mr. Justice Lokeshwar Prasad, President—Since the above mentioned three appeals, filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) have common facts and also raise common questions for consideration, the same with the consent of the learned Counsel for the appellant, have been heard together on the question of admission.

2. In all the above mentioned three appeals, the appellants had filed separate complaints under Section 12 of the Act before District Forum No. I, averring that the appellants had booked Maruti 800/AC cars, being manufactured by respondent No. 2, with respondent No. 1 on 28.12.1994 after raising loan from Bank of America. It is alleged that the respondents had made a promise to the appellants for the delivery of the cars in question within four months. The grievance of the appellants, in the complaints, filed by them before the District Forum, in nutshell, was that against their bookings the cars in question, instead of being delivered to the appellants, were disposed of by the respondents in open market on good premium/black money. Further grievance of the appellants was that in their case due to the above unfai



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top